| Literature DB >> 35572973 |
Xiaohe Dang1, Tao Xiang1, Can Zhao2, Hao Tang3, Pengfei Cui1.
Abstract
The concept of neurotrophic factor tyrosine kinase receptor (NTRK) fusion tumor has emerged in recent years. Moreover, NTRK fusion is unusual in common tumors but can often be identified in rare tumors. The NTRK fusion cervical or uterine tumors are mainly recognized through case reports due to their extremely low incidence. In this study, we reported a new case of EML4-NTRK3 fusion cervical sarcoma to enhance its recognition. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first case from a Chinese institution. We also conducted a literature review, in which a total of 19 cases of NTRK fusion cervical tumors and 4 cases of uterine tumors were retrieved. We summarized the clinicopathological features, treatment methods, and prognosis of these cases. Based on available information, we observed that surgery and complete excision, if possible, are still the primary modes of therapy. In addition, an increasing number of studies have shown that tropomyosin receptor kinases (TRK) inhibitors can improve the prognosis of cancer patients with NTRK gene fusion, which gives a silver lining for patients with metastatic lesions. We found that age and mitotic rate may be associated with recurrence or metastasis by univariate survival analysis. To draw more convincing conclusions, there is a need to establish an international database of rare cases and aggregate these sporadic cases.Entities:
Keywords: NTRK gene fusion; case report; cervical sarcoma; literature review; survival analysis
Year: 2022 PMID: 35572973 PMCID: PMC9096266 DOI: 10.3389/fmed.2022.832376
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Med (Lausanne) ISSN: 2296-858X
FIGURE 1(A–D) Images of the cervical tumor. (A) The pelvic MRI (sagittal T1-weighted images with contrast) showing a 1.8 × 1.5 × 1.3 cm abnormal signal in the anterior wall of the cervical-vaginal junction, which was considered a neoplastic lesion. (B) H&E-stained (200×) of the cervical tumor: the tumor tissue was composed of diffused spindle cells, arranged in crisscross bundles, sheets, or zigzag, and many blood vessels were seen and had low to moderate grade nuclear atypia. (C) Immunohistochemical (IHC) of S-100 (200×) was positive. (D) IHC of Pan-TRK (200×) was strongly positive.
FIGURE 2(A–D) Images of the brain tumor. (A) The head MRI (axial showed images) showing a 4.6 × 2.2 cm neoplastic lesion in the trigeminal area. (B) H&E-stained (200×): the tumor tissue is composed of homogenous spindle cells, arranged in bundles, swirls, and sheets, mitotic activity, and rich blood vessels. (C) IHC of S-100 (200×) was positive. (D) IHC of Pan-TRK (200×) was strongly positive.
FIGURE 3(A–D) Images of the vagina tumor. (A) The pelvic MRI (sagittal T1-weighted images with contrast) showing homogenous enhancement from the posterior vagina to the vulva with approximately 1.5 × 1.6 cm, which was considered tumor recurrence. (B) H&E-stained (200×): the tumor tissue is composed of predominantly monomorphic spindled cells arranged in bundles, sheets, or zigzag. The nuclei are oval, chromatin vacuolated, nucleoli are not evident, mitosis is easy to see, and no necrosis. (C) IHC of S-100 (200×) was positive. (D) IHC of Pan-TRK (200×) was strongly positive.
Univariate survival analysis.
| Factor | Case (patient number) | Recurrent group-n | Non-recurrent group-n | X2 | |
| Age | 5.772 | 0.016 | |||
| <35 y | 5, 6,9,10,11,12,13,16,17,18,24 | 3 | 8 | ||
| ≥35 y | 2,3,4,8,19,20,22 | 3 | 4 | ||
| Size (not including uterine tumors) | 0.001 | 0.982 | |||
| <5 cm | 4, 6,8,9,10,11,17,18,19,22,24 | 3 | 8 | ||
| ≥5 cm | 2,3,12,13,20 | 3 | 2 | ||
| Gene fusion type | 2.098 | 0.147 | |||
| TPM3-NTRK1 | 4, 6,8,9,10,11,12,17,20 | 1 | 8 | ||
| Non-TPM3-NTRK1 | 2,3,5,13,16,18,19,22,24 | 4 | 5 | ||
| Necrosis | 1.246 | 0.264 | |||
| Yes | 2,3,9,11,13 | 4 | 1 | ||
| No | 4,5,6,8,10,12,16,17,18,19,20,22,24 | 2 | 11 | ||
| Atypia | 2.016 | 0.156 | |||
| Mild | 10,11,12,16 | 1 | 3 | ||
| Moderate or severe | 2,3,4,5,6, 8,9,13,17,18,19,22,24 | 5 | 8 | ||
| Mitotic count | 6.884 | 0.009 | |||
| <10/10 hpfs | 5,6,8,9,12,13,16,17, 20,22 | 1 | 9 | ||
| ≥10/10 hpfs | 2,3,4,10,11,18,19,24 | 5 | 3 | ||
| Oophorectomy | 3.364 | 0.067 | |||
| No | 6,17,18,19,20 | 1 | 4 | ||
| Yes | 2,3,4,5,22,24 | 3 | 3 |
FIGURE 4Kaplan–Meier analysis curves of each statistically significant factor. (A) Age and (B) mitotic count.